NEW CASTLE —
It’s a common Republican Party theme:
Government has too many regulations. The rules it establishes and hoops it sets up for businesses to jump through impede growth and progress in our society.
A smaller, leaner government that avoids restrictions and burdensome rules would benefit the nation.
It’s a credible argument — one that can be documented in assorted ways.
So why, when it comes to Pennsylvania’s new Voter ID law, has the Republican Party taken a completely different tack?
In personal stories and court proceedings, we are learning how difficult this new law makes voting for some people, even though they are obviously qualified to do so.
Backers of the law try to say its rules are simple and it’s easy for everyone to comply with. But that’s not so. Perhaps for the average person, who has a driver’s license or other common ID, the law is no big deal. But not everyone is so fortunate to escape the clutches of the Voter ID law so readily.
This is why the law is still rattling around in the Pennsylvania court system. Even Republicans on the Pennsylvania Supreme Court refused to give their stamp of approval.
Instead, in what seems to be a move that gives the Corbett administration one last chance to legitimize the measure, the justices sent it back to the lower court for additional review, complete with a tougher set of standards.
Yet amid all the legal and political jousting, it’s worth asking the question: Why are heavy-handed regulations imposed on potential voters OK when such rules imposed on businesses produce cries of GOP outrage?
The answer can be provided in one word: Hypocrisy.
When the state’s Voter ID law was approved by a Republican-dominated Legislature and administration, we were told it was necessary to prevent voter fraud. However, no documentation of such fraud was produced. And when the legislation wound up in court, the Corbett administration admitted from the start it could provide no evidence of fraud.
Instead, the law was presented as a preventive measure, to make sure fraud never occurs. The fact it made voting difficult for thousands of Pennsylvanians apparently was of no great concern.
And last week, on a radio talk show, state Rep. Daryl Metcalfe, the main sponsor of the Voter ID legislation, dismissed complaints about the measure by saying, “... we have a lot of people out there that are too lazy to get up and get out there and get the ID they need.”
I wonder if he would say the same thing about businesses that chafe under state regulations.
What we see with the Voter ID law is one of the consequences of single-party rule. Ideally, the sausage grinder of the legislative process gives us a final product that’s been properly reviewed, tested and debated, with input from a variety of interests factored in.
But when one party — Democrat or Republican — is in complete control of government, a key goal is to find ways to shore up power and weaken the opposition. That was documented by House Majority Leader Mike Turzai, who told a GOP gathering earlier this year that the Voter ID law would assure a Mitt Romney victory in Pennsylvania.
However, there is a good chance the measure will not survive in the courts. And instead of giving Republicans additional advantage, the tactic provides Democrats with ammunition to use against the party in power.
In the end, Voter ID may come back to bite the GOP.
Mitchel Olszak
Related Photos
-
Mitchel Olszak, Dear Reader
Discussion
Mitchel Olszak: Voter ID rules fail Republican test
- Mitchel Olszak
-
-
Mitchel Olszak: Toomey takes a chance on guns
How does a conservative Republican senator representing a state with a Democratic majority protect himself politically? One way is to take positions that tend to straddle the nation’s ideological fence.
-
Mitchel Olszak: Terrorists strive to create fear
The finish line of a road race serves as the division between one world and another. Ahead of the finish line, there is structure and discipline, with attention paid to the runners as they cross over. Spectators are kept back, mainly to avoid interfering with the participants — and perhaps to keep them from being trampled.
-
Mitchel Olszak: Kelly, allies battle arms treaty
Supporters of the right to bear arms have a champion in Congressman Mike Kelly. The federal lawmaker, whose district includes most of Lawrence County, has been making waves with his criticism of the Obama administration and its support for the United Nations Arms Trade Treaty.
-
Mitchel Olszak: I like beer, so I’m watching our state closely
I like beer. More to the point, I like good beer. In my younger days, just about any swill would do. But with the passage of time, sophistication and exposure to the possibilities, my interests in beer have sharpened and matured.
-
Mitchel Olszak: Political lessons from distant past hold value today
If you want to gain an appreciation for great thinkers, read some of history’s major political philosophies. Here you will find the works of Plato, Machiavelli, Locke, Hobbes, Rousseau, St. Augustine and many others. They explored difficult social issues and offered serious insight.
-
Mitchel Olszak: Do the emotional centers of the brain guide our politics?
People who hold specific political points of view like to think their positions are based on serious analysis. They view their given ideologies as careful conclusions reached through assessing the world around them and examining how things work. Thus, liberals and conservatives both manage to claim the intellectual and ethical high ground.
-
Mitchel Olszak: Will GOP survive current divisions?
Somebody asked me the other day if I thought the Republican Party was about to split apart. I said no. It was an assessment based on history. Creating a new political party in America is a challenging process. They occasionally crop up, but they don’t last.
-
Mitchel Olszak: History as a matter of chance
History is full of pivotal moments. What if Socrates had decided against drinking that hemlock? What if Gutenberg hadn’t developed his printing press? What if Washington’s army failed to survive the winter at Valley Forge? What if Edison gave up on inventing the light bulb?
-
Mitchel Olszak: Pennsylvanians shouldn’t be fooled by electoral hijinks
Back in the 2000 presidential election, Americans received a civics lesson of sorts. Much of it involved obscure terms such as hanging and dimpled chads, as well as butterfly ballots. All of this, of course, came courtesy of Florida, whose clumsy election efforts produced an extended period of uncertainty in the presidential contest between George W. Bush and Al Gore.
-
Mitchel Olszak: CBS practices censorship to protect its interests
When it comes to integrity in the field of broadcasting, few can challenge the standing of CBS. Since the days of radio, this organization has stood out in its commitment to tough-minded, serious journalism. From Edward R. Murrow to Walter Cronkite to the current crop of reporters on “60 Minutes,” CBS has built a reputation no entity can match.
- More Mitchel Olszak Headlines
-
